kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 01:58 PM
Original message |
Do Democrats believe that taxcuts are the best way to spur the economy? |
|
Kennedy believed that cutting the top rate to 70% would help the economy? Does that mean we should raise the top rate back to 70% to help the economy?
As we know, some Senate Democrats are seriously considering extending the Bush taxcuts. They must believe that taxcuts will help create jobs and grow our economy? Otherwise, why would they support such an idea?
Philosophically, Democrats are not generally for huge taxcuts to help the wealthy create jobs. They believe the wealthy create jobs when there is more demand for their products, not because they have more money in their pockets.
Taxcuts that are spent in the economy are more effective than taxcuts that are saved or invested. We should ask ourselves, will the taxcuts given to those making $100K to $250K be saved or spent? If it does not benefit our economy, then should those taxcuts be extended also?
|
OHdem10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 02:12 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Since the over 250 K crowd are Big Businesses and Corporations |
|
if they provide jobs it will in Asia, India China, you get the picture. They profit by outsourcing and searching out the cheapest labor on the planet.
|
Bitwit1234
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 02:23 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Those making 250K and over are never going to be |
|
responsible for manufacturing jobs or spending their money to help the economy. Why in the damn hell are Democrats even thinking about extending those tax cuts. All it will do is put us deeper in debt, with all the uncollected taxes. I don't understand how we can find an honest politician anymore. Money rules.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 02:39 PM
Response to Original message |
|
there seems to be a lot of Democrats that have morphed into Repubs. Even here at DU, there are several devout followers of taxcuts as the best way to create jobs.
|
AndyA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I can answer your question with a couple of other questions. |
|
Did the Bush tax cuts of 2001 generate jobs between 2001-2008?
Did the Bush tax cuts stimulate the economy sufficiently to prevent a meltdown in 2008?
Did the middle class prosper during the Bush tax cut years?
Did you hear of any employers hiring people because of the tax cuts they'd received?
Have the Bush tax cuts had a negative impact on the deficit?
The people who want the tax cuts to stay in place are the ones who have benefitted the most from them, they are also the ones who will not feel the pinch if their taxes increase.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. So why do we have Democrats supporting extending Bush taxcuts?? |
|
Why are they so stupid or so Republican?
|
AndyA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. Lieberman, Nelson, and Conrad aren't really Democrats. |
|
Two of them may have D's after their name, but they really aren't Dems. Lieberman, well...we all know about good ole Joe, and the best thing I can say about him is we'd all have been better off if the Democrat had won Connecticut.
I think a lot of the Democrats are in conservative areas, and are afraid they won't be re-elected if they don't support extending the tax cuts. In short, they're doing what's best for themselves, not what's best for their constituents.
|
kratos12
(221 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 03:08 PM
Response to Original message |
6. No they don't believe it, they are simply too scared to buck |
|
what the Repukes have been able to turn into a percieved truth.
|
customerserviceguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 04:55 PM
Response to Original message |
8. The economy has one big systemic problem right now |
|
and that is the housing bubble. Paying people to buy houses was a way to do CPR on the housing market, but until the patient is well enough to survive without that, you're going to have a problem when you stop the chest compressions.
When housing prices get to the natural amount they should have been before the 1994-2005 run-up, then this economy will start to recover. It can't possibly happen until then, stimulus or no stimulus.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
So many empty houses and so many homeless people. Too bad that we have such a huge surplus of houses and so few people that can afford them. Years from now, we will still have empty houses. And we will still have homeless people. The system will not permit any other option.
|
customerserviceguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. It's called the free market |
|
and when the Feds started making up to $500K of profits on a home tax free for a married couple every two years, back in 1994, they fiddled with this market in a way that screwed it up big time.
|
Taitertots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-29-10 05:46 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Tax cuts hurt the economy |
|
As long as the money collected in taxes is spent, production increases. This is basic economics.
There is a lot of jargon to support this, but the gist is. People dedicate a portion of their income to savings, making their contribution to production less than if the government taxed them and spent all the money.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:18 AM
Response to Original message |